PASCAL FP64 SUCKS 1080P
PASCAL FP64 SUCKS DRIVERS
PASCAL FP64 SUCKS SOFTWARE
PASCAL FP64 SUCKS PLUS

Of coures, they also just did that new Modded vault thing to show off new Gameworks features.ДЄsync compute is DX12-specific, this game runs on DX11 doesn't it? Besides, Maxwell can do it exactly like Pascal does, it just has less queues available for it. It, in theory, should alleviate the bottleneck, but I never expected Nvidia to add it in any game so far beyond the major sell date.

PASCAL FP64 SUCKS SOFTWARE

Now I'm wondering if new software and new hardware may have finally added Async compute to the new GTX's.

PASCAL FP64 SUCKS DRIVERS

My 1080 managed to run Fallout 4 like a beast ever since I got it, never updated my drivers to or beyond that broken nvidia update and it seems to work fine.Д«tw, that Vault 1080 mod, totally not worth it even with a gtx 1080, It's just to show off what they could do with their 1080 and It looked pretty mediocre. However, people have complained the gtx 980ti drops below 40, not sure how the hell they even did that since my gtx 980ti I had before was running fine.

PASCAL FP64 SUCKS PLUS

Depends on your specs but at a certain point you'll be getting drops regardless of your specs, plus I have it locked at 60. Of coures, they also just did that new Modded vault thing to show off new Gameworks features. Shouldn't you like, not be running it above 60 anyway because of engine limitations? yet months and months after being informed you're wrong you are purposefully lying to 'attack' HBM yet again.Opprinnelig skrevet av Scarecrow:It drops but It won't drop below 60, only on a rare occasion where there's a ton of effects filling the screen and body parts flying everywhere but that's the engine's fault. You've posted this exact thing before and it's been pointed out to you many times that P100 has drastically more shaders than a GP102. You are so incredibly biased against AMD that you are attacking a new technology in HBM at every opportunity, once again lying about the shader count difference between Gp102 and P100 to try and imply that HBM doesn't help at all.

I responded on THAT subject, and surprisingly didn't use the opportunity of you trying to absurdly attack HBM yet again, to randomly post in praise of a Titan XP which isn't the subject matter of this thread or your post. This thread isn't about the Titan XP performance, it's not about Titan XP at all, you decided to have another pop at HBM and used the Titan XP shader count to try and say that HBM is somehow bad for the Tesla. even after Nvidia use it, you're tainting HBM, a new and exciting technology, just because AMD helped develop it and used it first. you can't explain yourself is what you're saying? The post is the height of hypocrisy as well.

PASCAL FP64 SUCKS 1080P

despite GDDR5 and GDDR5x cards like 980ti/Titan XP/1080 also showing less of a performance difference at 1080p than 4k to the cards below it.Д«ut then I'm responding to someone who thinks 3840 > 3584 + 1792. because you say so and it makes Fury suck at 1080p. The entire reason for stripping FP64 out of Maxwell was power saving.Д«ut you're right, HBM sucks, it uses more power and makes everything worse, it has worse latency. HPC workloads is generally smaller work on much greater data sets, meaning pulling huge data across the pci-e bus, which means more power usage, and 64bit cores have always used significantly more power than 32bit cores. In what way does a P100 which has 3584 SP cores and 1792 DP cores have less cores than a GP102 which has 3840 cores? Are we back to the part where you can't count? P100 is significantly larger than GP102, with more transistors, higher bandwidth cost and running workloads that pull more data from off card in general it SHOULD draw more power.

Pascal fp64 sucks